• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

HR1207 - Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009

B

brxndxn

Diamond Member
Okay.. so the Federal Reserve won't tell Congress where the trillions of dollars are going despite repeated requests.

Here's a bill that should help fix that:

HR 1207


I wrote an email to my representative.. Rep. Vern Buchanan (who made his many millions selling car insurance using offshore tax havens). Hopefully he'll support this.. though I think he won't.

At least this is a bill that we can all agree on, right?
 
Originally posted by: brxndxn
Okay.. so the Federal Reserve won't tell Congress where the trillions of dollars are going despite repeated requests.

Here's a bill that should help fix that:

HR 1207


I wrote an email to my representative.. Rep. Vern Buchanan (who made his many millions selling car insurance using offshore tax havens). Hopefully he'll support this.. though I think he won't.

At least this is a bill that we can all agree on, right?
Click to expand...

It sounds good on the surface, but a Ron Paul bill? I'd like to hear what the Congress members I listen to - Kucinich, Stark, Waxman for example - have to say about it.
 
Originally posted by: Craig234
It sounds good on the surface, but a Ron Paul bill? I'd like to hear what the Congress members I listen to - Kucinich, Stark, Waxman for example - have to say about it.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's always safest to listen to the people from your party so they can tell you what to think. :roll:
 
Hm, I don't know if this would be a good thing....

For one, they won't reveal who all the money is going to because any time a bank needed to increase reserves people would freak and withdraw all their money, leading to a run on said bank/institution.
 
I don't know if this would be the best of ideas, however, I do believe that it is always best to err on the side of transparency/honesty. If people start reacting to new news about their bank, that doesn't mean that different actions cannot be taken. Our system is flexible enough to handle it...
 
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Hm, I don't know if this would be a good thing....

For one, they won't reveal who all the money is going to because any time a bank needed to increase reserves people would freak and withdraw all their money, leading to a run on said bank/institution.
Click to expand...

A run on the banks (when guaranteed by the FDIC) would be better than banks being able to leverage themselves ridiculously like they have been or keep toxic assets on the books..

When WE THE PEOPLE put our money in a bank, we have a right to know if that bank is being propped up by Fed loans (again.. OUR MONEY).

 
Hm.

If they would streamline applying to FDIC to get your funds back (IE you can access them in 24 hours instead of it taking up to a year), I bet people wouldn't care as much if a bank went under.
 
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Hm.

If they would streamline applying to FDIC to get your funds back (IE you can access them in 24 hours instead of it taking up to a year), I bet people wouldn't care as much if a bank went under.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of people never loss any access to their funds.
 
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Hm.

If they would streamline applying to FDIC to get your funds back (IE you can access them in 24 hours instead of it taking up to a year), I bet people wouldn't care as much if a bank went under.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of people never loss any access to their funds.
Click to expand...

You mean the people that are under the deposit limit?

You do realize of the course the vast majority of accounts over the limit are business accounts, so if you like to get your pay check on the 15th and 30th my suggestion is you don't want to have runs on the bank. If however you feel you be better served waiting for the bank assets to be liquidated and having your payroll check bounce, get rid of the fed, unlever gold contracts and go back to islamic banking.

It is a good thing my people run the world otherwise we would be in for a world of hurt, because the average American and politician really understands very very little about banking or the intrinsic value of assets.
 
We will not see any oversight at all IMO. No matter how much we want it. In this thread a couple of paragraphs point this out pretty clearly.

None other than disgraced senator Ted Stevens was the poor sap who made the unpleasant discovery that if Congress didn't like the Fed handing trillions of dollars to banks without any oversight, Congress could apparently go fuck itself ? or so said the law. When Stevens asked the GAO about what authority Congress has to monitor the Fed, he got back a letter citing an obscure statute that nobody had ever heard of before: the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950. The relevant section, 31 USC 714(b), dictated that congressional audits of the Federal Reserve may not include "deliberations, decisions and actions on monetary policy matters." The exemption, as Foss notes, "basically includes everything." According to the law, in other words, the Fed simply cannot be audited by Congress. Or by anyone else, for that matter.
Click to expand...

and

The situation with the first TARP payments grew so absurd that when the Congressional Oversight Panel, charged with monitoring the bailout money, sent a query to Paulson asking how he decided whom to give money to, Treasury responded ? and this isn't a joke ? by directing the panel to a copy of the TARP application form on its website. Elizabeth Warren, the chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel, was struck nearly speechless by the response.
Click to expand...

Authoritarian economic rule? You decide.
 
I thought this administration was supposed to be the most transparent ever. Wouldn't we simply need Obama to tell the Treasury to do this?

Yes he can! Yes he can!

lol
 
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
I thought this administration was supposed to be the most transparent ever. Wouldn't we simply need Obama to tell the Treasury to do this?

Yes he can! Yes he can!

lol
Click to expand...

No, the law would need to be changed, from what I understand.

If the Democrats are so big on oversight and regulation, then why aren't they jumping on Paul's bill?
 
It'll kinda defeat the purpose of giving the banks those funds in the first place. Soon as people find out that someone is running into trouble, they'll immediately remove their funds, ensuring their collapse.

Better to fix the problem first-- reserve requirements for CDS.
 
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Pardon me while I cut my nose off to spite my face.
Click to expand...

What are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

Uhhh...dunno...chaos and collapse of the word economy? How about you?
Click to expand...

How many times have we heard that one now? You might as well be screaming "911!," "terrrists!!"
 
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Pardon me while I cut my nose off to spite my face.
Click to expand...

What are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

Uhhh...dunno...chaos and collapse of the word economy? How about you?
Click to expand...

How many times have we heard that one now? You might as well be screaming "911!," "terrrists!!"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess the Great Depression, where the Fed did nothing and let the market to fall apart, and Mark to Chaos accounting didn't teach us anything.

For as bad as things could be, they aren't all that bad. Why? Because the moves being made are mostly the right ones.
 
Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Originally posted by: smack Down
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Hm.

If they would streamline applying to FDIC to get your funds back (IE you can access them in 24 hours instead of it taking up to a year), I bet people wouldn't care as much if a bank went under.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of people never loss any access to their funds.
Click to expand...

You mean the people that are under the deposit limit?

You do realize of the course the vast majority of accounts over the limit are business accounts, so if you like to get your pay check on the 15th and 30th my suggestion is you don't want to have runs on the bank. If however you feel you be better served waiting for the bank assets to be liquidated and having your payroll check bounce, get rid of the fed, unlever gold contracts and go back to islamic banking.

It is a good thing my people run the world otherwise we would be in for a world of hurt, because the average American and politician really understands very very little about banking or the intrinsic value of assets.
Click to expand...

Oh noes, its teh J00z...

All I'm gonna say is notice the pattern that people with no background in finance and/or economics make up the majority of Paulonomics supporters.
 
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Pardon me while I cut my nose off to spite my face.
Click to expand...

What are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

Uhhh...dunno...chaos and collapse of the word economy? How about you?
Click to expand...

How many times have we heard that one now? You might as well be screaming "911!," "terrrists!!"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess the Great Depression, where the Fed did nothing and let the market to fall apart, and Mark to Chaos accounting didn't teach us anything.

For as bad as things could be, they aren't all that bad. Why? Because the moves being made are mostly the right ones.
Click to expand...

:laugh:

Yeah, and Bush's moves made us safer from terrrrists!

Hey, you mean they booted up the printing machines, handed over enormous amounts of taxpayer money to private corporations, took over some, and things are ok now? Oh, and I forgot all the stimulus packages, and the ever-increasing mountain of debt. And that also makes things ok now?

Sure they are. For the time being. Yup, we're all buzzed again. Gonna be one hell of a hangover though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top